DVD Forum Getting Ready For DVD 2.0

[AzBat]

A friend told me about this last night while playing on Xbox Live. Haven't seen any coverage here or much anywhere else. But the gist of the story is that the DVD Forum headed by Toshiba and co-chaired by Microsoft and Panasonic are looking to add HD-DVD features to the DVD standard, in essence DVD 2.0.

Here's the list of supported features going round...

DVD 2.0 Format Specification

1. Video encoded in MPEG2 SD
2. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p
3. HDi interactivity
4. Networking
5. Managed Copy
6. Fully backward compatible with existing DVD players.

Here's the source of the original story...

http://www.contentagenda.com/article/CA6539511.html

Here's a few forums discussing it...

http://www.dvdtown.com/messageboard/topic/6725/6/0 -- OVER 19 pages!
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1006681

Tommy McClain

 

[AlNom]

too little too late? :|

I would have just liked to see higher bit rate encoding mandated... like 5 years ago.

 

[tirminyl]

I found this rather amusing. All HD-DVD features without the storage capacity.

Ninja Edit- Seems they will be using a 24gb red laser disc?

 

[Zaphod]

They're just trying to stretch the legs of DVD by leveraging the strengths of HD DVD in the existing format without the HD. In the current situation, I cant say I blame them.

 

[Ty]

Will I need a new DVD player?

 

[nthd]

6. Fully backward compatible with existing DVD players.

 

[Geeforcer]

So what would the upside of going out and buying a DVD 2.0 player instead of BD be? If MS and Toshiba have not lost enough money on the HD-DVD, they can just give it to me instead of coming up elaborate schemes to waste it.

 

[patsu]

6. Fully backward compatible with existing DVD players.

I doubt it. The b/c probably applies only to movie playback. To play HDi, you'll need a network connector, extra memory, a firmware for HDi parser and new codecs. So my guess is, you'll need a new standalone DVD player (Xbox 360 should be fine). Then, they will need to convince movie studios to do HDi content for DVD 2.0.

 

[N00b]

I found this rather amusing. All HD-DVD features without the storage capacity.

Ninja Edit- Seems they will be using a 24gb red laser disc?

Who knows. Maybe DVD2 will be dual-layer with VC-1 encoded HD video on the second layer.

 

[pascal]

Who knows. Maybe DVD2 will be dual-layer with VC-1 encoded HD video on the second layer.

Maybe like what they do with some SACD audio discs. One layer standard CD and other SACD. To see the High definition part you will need a new player.

I will keep my PS3

 

[LunchBox]

How much will these dvd discs cost?

if the price won't be carried over to the consumers then it's all good

2. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p

it's upconversion to 960p? What will be the difference between super upconversion to 960p to upconversion to 1080i / 1080p ?

 

[Brad Grenz]

Yeah, I'm fairly dubious about what "super up-conversion" is. At any rate, I'm guessing the resolution is actually 960x540. 960 makes more sense as a horizontal resolution than a vertical one, but 960p sure sounds better than 540p.

 

[vazel]

This would be a really nice DVD extension. All it would take for me to play is an update on PowerDVD on my HTPC.

 

[Babel-17]

960p sounds like line doubling. Most DVD's in the US are at 720 x 480 lines of resolution.

 

[Brad Grenz]

DVDs are interlaced, though. You line double to get to 480p. 960p in that case would be line quadrupling, yeah? In any case, what displays accept a "960p" signal unless it's really 540p (1080i)?

 

[vazel]

DVDs are interlaced, though. You line double to get to 480p.

Except when it's 23.976 progressive. And when de-interlacing it's not as simple as line doubling the best de-interlacers use various methods.

 

[SPM]

Does fully backward compatible with existing DVD players mean you can play the new disks on all existing DVD players? If not, I can't see a hope in hell of this format catching on.

 

[kyleb]

Yeah, I'm fairly dubious about what "super up-conversion" is. At any rate, I'm guessing the resolution is actually 960x540. 960 makes more sense as a horizontal resolution than a vertical one, but 960p sure sounds better than 540p.

Sure, and 1280p sounds better than 720p too, but the listing the vertical resolution is how the nomenclature works, so it would be absurd to use the horizontal instead.

DVDs are interlaced, though. You line double to get to 480p. 960p in that case would be line quadrupling, yeah? In any case, what displays accept a "960p" signal unless it's really 540p (1080i)?

NTSC DVDs are interlaced, but they are deinterlaced by weaving the two feilds together to get 480p, not line doubling. And 1080i isn't the same thing as 540p either.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Sure, and 1280p sounds better than 720p too, but the listing the vertical resolution is how the nomenclature works, so it would be absurd to use the horizontal instead.

Well, my old toshiba scaler had a 1024p mode which was actually 1024x768 so it's not like they're above fucking with the nomenclature when it suits them.

NTSC DVDs are interlaced, but they are deinterlaced by weaving the two feilds together to get 480p, not line doubling. And 1080i isn't the same thing as 540p either.

OK, fair enough. And I realize 1080i /= 540p, but my native 1080i set recognizes and supports a 540p signal just fine, whereas I have my doubts that a "960p" signal would work, if that indeed refers to vertical resolution.

 

[pcchen]

Although technically DVD only supports interlaced video, films are transformed into interlaced through telecine, therefore an inverse telecine process can easily convert it back into progressive video. This is already done by many newer DVD players, and also by most computer based DVD player programs.